In only the second time since the inaugural year 2000, Putin touched down in Pyongyang—to great adulation and fanfare: The visit comes directly after Russia intimated a mirror response to the West for its arming of Ukraine with advanced weaponry that can strike Russian territory. Not surprisingly, Putin’s visit was highlighted by a signing of a weighty ‘strategic document’ which included the implied possibility of Russia arming North Korea with its own stable of advanced weaponry.
It seems the march to war continues. The teams are lining up, and with DPRK on board the Eurasians are looking very strong. Once the war in Lebanon begins it will be much clearer who is positioned where. Troubled times indeed.
The Russians are now assuming postures of their own to counter the chronic western posturing. It is a war of posturing now. We have been here before. It will all dissolve after November.
I am sure, and I very much hope, that the security and other arrangements with North Korea, are more serious well thought through, motivated and intended, than 'a war of posturing' - especially one in response to various vacuous western theatrics
I would attribute more weight to the evident intent of the China RF Joint Declaration to lay the bases for a multipolar world
NK is mentioned in this document - and it is right and fitting that this VVP visit and agreements with NK, are the first fruit thereof
It is clear that NK is a serious consideration for them both, as NK is indeed for Iran and for other West Asia resistance to the USNATO
It is time to put paid to the frozen war in the Koreas, and to the long effective occupation of Japan - both these countries, despite a smatter of commercial success are undergoing degrees of social & political decline and degradation that is outmatched only by the US
Going by the expressions on the faces of both sides in the meeting photo above, I think their meetings were dead serious. I doubt there was even a nanosecond of posturing.
Very sensible of them, especially given Bidens "Squad" program, enjoining the US, Australia, New Zealand and Japan as comrades in arms for some future misery.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/you-will-be-tagged-and-you-will-love-it Did simplicius talk about Igor Ashmanov objection to biometrics while russian officials are all for it? Why is ppl here keeping on heaping the RU+CN vs West retheoric? or it is more like an elites one-world-world of RU+CN+US+EU against common ppl?
The road to hell may be paved with good intentions; but the express train to the apocalypse is built out of corrupt officials who honestly believe the worst can’t happen.
The Hegemon never sleeps. I can guarantee there is no underestimation on the opposite side. They are well aware of the historical patterns at play. It is rare for a declining Hegemon to retire on some tropical island. And the US is a particularly nasty variety of hegemon. The Ukrainian threats to target schools says it all. USUK are the terror empires.
The Issue with the US is they have never had conflict on their soil. The immigrant population has never been tested on their patriotism in bad times. The otherside is made up of nations that have been invaded and destroyed. So for them the history is not a narrative, but reality that has been lived. Terror states, that have made many enemies and have exposed populations it must be considered that every game, two can play at it. Its good to live in a glass house and throw stones when you neighbours want a peaceful life and will not react. What happens when the neighbour becomes fed up and throws one stone back?
Was the original statement about the invasion of any country? I thought you were referring to terrorism. The US is protected by two oceans and has strategic depth from all approaches. Why exactly would any nation want to invade the US in an age of intercontinental ballistic missile with the ability to carry up to 20 hypersonic nuclear tipped glide vehicles with 100 mega tonne war heads each?
Re: "intercontinental ballistic missile with the ability to carry up to 20 hypersonic nuclear tipped glide vehicles with 100 mega tonne war heads each"
Oh ya, sure, you betcha, kiddo! Those Rooskies can put TWENTY (full yield variants) Tsar Bomba size warheads on a single ICBM, all carried by hypersonic glide vehicles...
Nope. Go look at the physics package dimensions of a 100 MT device. Hell, just look at the MASS of nuclear materials calculated at highest ever reported efficiency. I started on the back of a napkin, but it got so reDACulous I couldn't finish...
Regardless, one small nuclear weapons paired with a modern highly accurate delivery system will ruin your whole day, the inevitable escalation after any such will ruin EVERYONE'S EVER AFTER.
And according to John O'Looney's sources, a large portion of the remainder are trained and waiting for orders to act in the UK and presumably in the US.
An invading army of millions would easily take down the US infrastructure prior to any war, the US would be a sitting duck. Would missiles be necessary, yes to take out key US centers, but then again if the current US govt is in on the plan, perhaps not.
I'm afraid that the invasion of the US has already happened with 100's of thousands of Chinese that poured across the southern border. It looks like they came via Ecuador, who just shut down their Chinese visas because of 'irregularities'. Now that they are in the US, the Chinese illegals are waiting for the go ahead.
Crazy xenophobic people in USA back between WWI and WWII used to write whole books about how the perfidious Niponese had already inserted their evil slant eyed yellow skinned invading forces AND all required equipment to take the entire western USA in a surprise attack, these wiley Asians only waiting for a secret signal from their emperor... There is nothing new under the (rising?) sun.
Your assumption here is that the thousands of Chinese individuals arriving in the US are part of some highly coordinated "sleeper agent" operation, but I don't see any reason to believe this rather than the more plausible explanation that they simply want to live in America. As the other comment above indicates, this sort of behavior is not new in the US, and has previously been directed at Germans and Japanese immigrants. But the reality is that America is attractive for a large number of people around the world, regardless of whether you think because of the US being the true home of the "virtuous and free", or simply because of it merely presenting a gaudy facade of nihilistic consumerism.
Of course---compare the age of the US (248 yrs old) to China or Russia or Iran or any Korea.... Why would the US or here in Canada (157 yrs) have that. Yes Israel is different (76 yrs) but it is not an organic country-- it was imposed in an already established area. The only conflict the US had recently was the self imposed (with help from Israel) 9-11.
"Never had conflict on their soil" - you are ignoring history
The original Mayflower settlers were at war from the start with the original original settlers before them - this is still unfinished and ongoing
They then imported slave labour
They then fought between themselves (Civil War) both sides importing proxies to do the dirty work
They (the ruling class descendants of the Mayfowers and their inducted identity allies) now say they are once again importing slave labour to do their labouring and their fighting for them, except it is likely these inductees will be used against the descendants of those long ago imported proxies who are no longer of use, either fighting or labouring
Well you are also forgetting the war of 1812 when the capital was burned. My anology was more intended to imply a test of the new immigrant population that came after those early wars.
USUK are captives of Zionists and Neocon Jews. Jews and the CIA killed President Kennedy in 1963 and the USA will not return to a Republic until Israel is eliminated.
In my humble opinion the so called Hegemon shat his pants while mumbling nonsense right before the world to see on a giant stage. We are already in the stage of multi polarity, and that means of course lots of long wars. Unless there is a economic collapse of a couple of big Western nations including the US, Germany, France and the UK, and if that happens, we will probably have peace and no big wars for a long time.
There seems to be some mismatches with the numbers.
The Russians appear to be using far less artillery than they are producing and sourcing
On the other hand, armored vehicles are so consumable now that you could produce 10,000 and it wouldn't be enough. The drone problem applies to both sides; just as Abrams and Leopards have fallen to them, so have T-90's and T-80's.
Air defense systems & anti-drone systems are the innovations that are sorely needed on both sides. I suspect the Chinese already have something on the drone side
agreed. Drones are key. Sure the Russians are improving their both their drone and counter drone capabilities but they are not as significant as tank production from an industrial point of view.
How usage numbers correlate with production numbers? And even then S numbers are way off. I don't know which sources he uses, but he underestimate artillery shell production 5x times and T90s were in production non stop, not just recently. Russia have bottomless pit of tanks to use and modernize, don't you worry.
The movie "Threads" is old school, typically UK underestimation of what would happen. For example, they grossly underestimate the number of nukes that will detonate over the UK and they leave too many people still alive. The UK is a very small region with much of the population densely packed into urban areas (even more so in modern times). A Russian strike today would kill 95% of the population.
An analogous nuclear war movie for the US is "The Day After." But that, too, underestimates what would happen even though it features strikes on the Kansas City region, with many strikes on silos. It only shows a single nuke hitting Kansas City (leaving the university and medical center on the outskirts intact) when in reality there would be around a dozen strikes neatly tiling the area.
Those classic movies also don't show what will happen to all of the US's vassals in the event of a strategic exchange. Russia will strike every country that went along with US sanctions, which seized Russian vessels or which in any other way committed acts of war against Russia, such as providing weapons to Kiev.
For example, the self-satisfied imbeciles in New Zealand think they'll be safe in a nuclear conflict that eradicates the Northern Hemisphere but in reality around a dozen Russian nukes will strike them to ensure 95% of their population is incinerated. Same with Australia, South Korea, Japan (of course), Fiji (they seized a Russian vessel), Switzerland, and so on. Anybody who thinks Russia is going to let the West kill over half of Russia's population without Russia wiping out every vassal and ally of the West in return is nuts. When the nukes start flying payback will come knocking on every vassal's door.
There was a Putin interview a month or two ago, in Russian, where it was I think the only time I got a glimpse of what would happen. He was going on about threats to the Russian state and various scenarios, but then, in a moment, he said something along the lines of "if the worst were to happen, it would be an unbelievable tragedy, and Russia would be destroyed. But then, if you ask me what I would do, I would ask you, what is the point of a world without russia?"
And the look on his face said it all - if you think you can destroy us, I promise to take you all to hell with me. It was his most Russian moment ever, in contrast to the usual measured style we are used to.
I'm paraphrasing a bit as I can't recall the interview exactly, just as a clarifier
I hope you remember that we had a brief discussion about the generalised world wide reduction in fertility rates
Due, as I averred, to capitalism, with the only exceptions to this reduction being therefore in countries where persisted the traditional ways of life, if possible pre agricultural – such as Central Africa
I found this comment in a China blog, discussing the China gvmt policy – and hope it might interest you
It appeared to me to lend a modern formulation and structure to those policies which, otherwise, may seem a little neo traditionalist, too reliant on reviving of the old ways of living
This criticises quite severely the lazy laissez faire doctrine displayed by a recent article in The Economist
I hope that your 95% revision of the "Threads" scenario is correct, and that it refers to immediate rather than lingering deaths. My nightmare is my or any of my family's being in the 5%. When it looked like Hilary Clinton was likely to be elected and start WW3, we talked of arranging some painless method of group self-deletion in case we survived the initial strike. But it would be much better not to have to bother.
Alois Irlmaier predicted everything flawlessly until today. According to him, it will last 3,5 months. It is really worthwhile to read his predictions.
The apparent drone threat to tanks plays to Russian advantage.
Why?
Drones made it possible to reliably mission-kill a tank using SMALLER warhead than other weapons use (arty, ATGMs), because they made it very easy to hit the right spot of the tank.
And what that leads to?
The vast majority of "destroyed" tanks (the same applies to other vehicles, even unarmored) suffer very light damage in the process. While yes, they're out of the fight, they're relatively easily to repair, or reuse.
And Russia has far larger capacity to recover and repair armored vehicles than the other side. And typically, they're easier to repair than western vehicles, making the hill for the West even steeper.
It's one of the classic military planning dilemmas Soviets/Russian military school of thought talks about a lot.
And it explains a lot about the difference between a typical West/NATO/US militaries and Eastern Front of WW2/Warsaw Pact/Soviet/Russian ones.
While western planners are trying to make it harder to lose an asset (which gets expensive, hard to make and ends up not even being well protected), Russians simply assume the enemy will always find a way to kill it, so their plan revolves about recovering the lost asset as easily as possible.
The easier it is to recover that asset, the easier it is to generate new fighting force or recover the old one. That is by the way why most western conflicts are planned to be short and intense (and then end up being long anyway, but that's another matter) while Russians don't seem to be in a hurry.
It leads to very weird paradoxes: if you have two sides (A and B) and they both start with 100 tanks, it's entirely possible for A to kill more tanks than B, but B wins the fight with more tanks intact.
The West has adopted the Nazi Germany school of having a limited number of high value platforms. It didn't work for them, why the West would think it wise is hard to fathom. It's not even cheaper.
The expectation during the Cold War was that if the attack into West Germany ever happened, nukes would be necessary to stop the Soviets. There was wishful thinking but that was the bottom line. There would never be enough soldiers and weaponry to stop the Soviet forces in time. I'm not that old. I don't understand why that was forgotten.
The problem with ColdnWar rhetoric is that the Eastern bloc's western part had next to no means to conduct an invasion. No heavy MLRS, cheap tanks, only a few tactical ballistic missiles, no bombers whatsoever and only a few fighter-bombers which were of low capability sort. If the Soviets intended to attack, they'd need to visibly prepare for a long time, which would give plenty of time for the West to prepare.
The second point is, that perhaps it's not the West adopting Nazi Germany school of thought, but rather Nazi Germany adopting a colonial mindset and trying to fight a war of attrition with it. It existed before - virtually all colonial empires were built upon forces relatively low in numbers but with big technological superiority. Nazis problem was that their technological superiority was quite small and in some cases didn't even exist. They lost the naval conflict war against navies with superior numbers but almost matching them technologically. They were winning the air war right until the enemy reached technological parity and then lost because the enemy pulled ahead in numbers. They lost the land war because their thought they have big technological superiority, but in reality their superior forces were really small and everywhere else the enemy matched them technologically and eventually curbstomped them in numbers.
They lost in WW2 for the same reasons colonial empires lost some of their colonial wars.
My point was that the counterexample was obvious after WWII. V-weapons, boutique tanks and overengineered firearms were unable to stand against cheap mass production of 'good enough' weaponry. So why would you go back to making boutique weapons, sitting in the West? The whole MIC complex in the US is devoted to making such overengineered and expensive weapons.
Germany rearmed on the basis of a small mobile force - about 1/10th of their army, later expanding to 1/5th - and the remainder being horse drawn WWI equivalents as you note. Then expedient after expedient was tried to restore technological superiority to that slice of the army, particularly after it was realized that the Soviet armor was better than the German stuff in 1941. There really wasn't any significant technological advantage in the air or at sea, even early on. Bismarck wasn't all that much better than the opposing capital ships, aside from being new. The German planes of the early war were equivalents of the opposing Allied aircraft, nothing more.
But what I really speak of is the late war situation where small numbers of very expensive armor were constructed and StG-44 weapons were in use. Having 500 King Tigers vs 4k IS-2s and innumerable Shermans and T-34s wasn't very helpful. And for all the complaints that the StG-44 wasn't well made, it required a lot more effort to build than PPS/PPSh submachine guns and it showed in how ubiquitous they were.
The colonial wars were the way they were because the technology of rapid firing weapons, armored ships and then aircraft hadn't hit the 'global south' locations, so the wars were like that, cakewalks. The tables had turned by the 1950s.
Interestingly, the UK *alone* outproduced Germany and German-occupied Europe between 1939-1941 in aircraft, in respect of which the UK already had reached technological parity. Hitler, as a populist leader, always tried to go for butter rather than guns - until he started having to gear up to a war economy from 1942, by which time it was waaay too late. ;).
Indeed. Eisenhower introduced the system whereby any conflict anywhere in the world between Russian and US forces larger than a single battalion would automatically trigger general nuclear war - including a first strike taking out Russia, China and every other nation that was preplanned to be treated as a hostile power even if it wasn't, plus of course Western Europe in fallout. The reason for that was purely fiscal policy, for the reasons you've described. It remains to be seen if the USA's doctrine has become more nuanced since then. ;)
Not all, it's become bon-ton to visit crippled war engines with a grenade drop or two to make sure they ignite properly. It helps that the crew usually leaves hatches open.
It's looking bad, chief. Commentators are using War Thunder stats. More allies are being armed and called in. Southeast Asia is beginning to pop like movie theater popcorn because both the US (through the Philippines, just look at the straight China coverage we have) and China (so many sea incidents) are upping the temperature even more than the new Taiwan government.
I guess there is a lot more positioning going on we don't know about. They are all waiting till the US election. If Biden pulls off a return of the zombie the temperature will dial up big time.
I think a lot of the bureautrash are their kids and nephews and nieces - and I think for many of the biggest ones, their interests are also served by a little bit of popping off.
A lot of popping off, maybe not so much unless the boltholes are ready. Parachuting into board positions in China or bugout bunkers in NZ, staying back to loot the farmland and other necessities, there's probably already a plan in place.
Only the very stupid ones who can not get real jobs
The dominants have been very, very, successful come rain or shine for two hundred years, in this current iteration
They are not going to destroy the golden goose
Nor is their idea of success living in a cave
To use this war to destroy some more of the States and render it even more supine - to consolidate a deal with China and Asia - yes, and by so doing gain access to and peace with Russia
No, abc. I think the direction will be dissolution of all this hysteria either way. If Biden wins he no longer has to adopt electioneering postures and neither do his teams.
The real driving force behind all this geopolitical movement towards war lies at a higher level, IMO.
The multinational corporate and banking world is drowning in debt and derivative obligations. There is only one way for them to get out of it – declare force majeure. However, this can only be done in extraordinary circumstances – like a world war. So beyond Gaza/Ukraine/Taiwan, the hidden forces are working to bring the world to war once more so they can get out from under the debt. Will it escalate to nuclear war? Will these PTB be able to confine this pending war to conventional weapons? That is the big question.
I agree that the western imperialists are burdened with a crushing unplayable levels of non productive debt but a nuclear war would kill the goose that lays the golden egg. As deranged as many of their strategist are I feel that the ruling class will hesitant to go down such a road as there is no going back and nothing to rule over once you go nuclear.
You talk like a rational person, but I'm not convinced. These people have little or no connection with the real world of real people. They live in a cocoon of fantasy. And many of them actually believe the West can win a nuclear war. And those who don't believe they have the power to keep a world war restricted to conventional weaponry. Both camps are completely bought into their respective fantasies.
It's like those who believe they can kill off 90% of the world's population and still enjoy a high standard of living afterwards in a world of no industry, no agriculture, no services - because the armies of little people who worked in those sectors are no longer alive.
Modern technology require large populations - the lower your population, the lower your available technology.
You mean if Trump were to get selected he would down the temperature? 🤣 MAGA is all about dialing up the temperature, whether economically or militarily. Trump would make Joe "Genocide" Biden look like a peace dove.
If history is any indication there will be a hiatus as happened in 2016. It takes time to recalibrate between administrations, even if the deep state motors along regardless. My gut feeling is that Trump would dial down the hot war with Russia and pivot to China and Iran. Trump and NATO don't seem to mix well. The aggressive foreign posture is in the US DNA. No leader would dial down the rhetoric. To Trump's credit, he did negotiate an end to the Afghan debacle and pushed for detente with the DPRK.
I don't believe Trump was ever anti-NATO - that is a notion shared by many people, but it simply is not true. He was only pissed off that the Europeans were not contributing their fair share and that if they didn't ante up, he would leave the organisation - that was merely to pile pressure on them. And it worked.
I think he saw the defense of Europe as Europe's problem. He wanted good relations with Russia, which is why he was subjected to charges of being a Russian agent.
If Afghanistan really were about natural resources (it isn't), the obvious thing to do is to cut a deal with the Taliban.
Sort of like with the Saudis. For that matter, Saddam would have been thrilled to be able to sell oil freely on global markets for dollars. The US didn't let him - remember the "oil for food" program?
He did negotiate an end to the war, and had set a date for troop withdrawal.
Biden blew off the date, and then ended up not only leaving the equipment behind, which Trump would not have done, but getting troops killed in the process.
If Trump would have been really interested to end the war he would have withdrawn the troops during his administration, and not set a date for after his administration.
Trump knows as no other that agreements can be reneged on, esp. by the Americans. proof: the JCPOA, which the U.S. (thanks to our hero Trump) unilaterally withdrew on despite there being proof verified by the IAEA AND the U.S. itself that Iran was sticking to the agreement.
Blaming the Afghan withdrawal mess on Biden is a very weak excuse invented by Trumpists to let him off the hook. Not that Biden is any better, of course.
From that Wikipedia article: "...the agreement did not involve the then Afghan government. The deal, which also had secret annexes, was one of the critical events that caused the collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces."
* Typical U.S. arrogance to leave the Afghan government out.
* Secret annexes — serious stuff must be in there. Nefarious stuff? Nothing would surprise me.
* caused the collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces: what an achievement, Mr. Trump.
Yet no new wars were started nor escalated during his Presidency. Trump is about trade, business, the return of industry to the US, he is not about war.
Trump was in a box, he had no control over his military, they lied to him, prevented him from getting information. He had the FBI, CIA, DOD, Pentagon all against him.
Who knows if he ordered those strikes? Who knows what he was told if he did? Remember when he was meeting with Xi and he was told that Soleimani had been killed? Xi was furious and left the next day. Whatever deals Trump was working on with Xi were toast.
Why would Trump do that? I don't think he did, I think the order was given and Trump was told about it after the fact. It is a distinct possibility. To save face Trump said he ordered it. Yes he may have, but to have it happen while Xi was there?
Trump and his Conservative cult are the Red State faction of the American Evil Empire.
This is opposed to Biden and his Liberal cult, who are the Blue State faction of the American Evil Empire.
The political "differences" between them are just like American democracy in general: as fake as professional wrestling.
At the end of the day, both factions support the American Empire and its dominance of the world--which, in Orwellian American fashion, they both call "defending freedom and democracy."
Their only differences are the *tactics* they push in order to achieve this shared imperial ambition.
Trump thus had his Make American (Empire) Great Again slogan.
And Biden had his American (Empire) Is Back slogan.
The Red Staters want the American Empire to focus on war against China or Iran/Islam in order to maintain American world dominance.
The Blue Staters want the American Empire to focus on war against Russia in order to maintain American world dominance.
That is why these Red State Conservatives are aggressively pushing anti-China or anti-Islam propaganda so as to manufacture public consent for American escalation against them.
And that is why Blue State Liberals are aggressively pushing anti-Russia propaganda so as to manufacture public consent for American escalation against it.
The Red States and Blue States are two sides of the same imperial American coin.
Both sides will try to portray themselves as "anti-Establishment critics" or even as "antiwar dissidents."
And both sides are lying through their teeth.
As Vladimir Putin himself has said, America is the Empire of Lies.
Everything about America is deception--including its phony political factions and US democracy itself.
They're even using them wrong. Where Russia fields its T-62Ms, NATO responds with Leopards 1A5, which are of the same age, output and WT battle rating.
"A defeated Ukraine will switch to horrible terror attacks against Russia "(paraphrase). OR- much more likely.....
"A defeated Ukraine, IF any of it is left standing, will start a war of terror against its false friend, the perfidious west that led it into a crazy act of self destruction. Ukraine had a get-out in April 22. Western leaders, not Russia, persuaded the Ukrainians not to take it. Its annihilation then became inevitable.
I have said all along that ultimately the interests of the West and the Russians will converge over the head of, and against, Ukraine. And Zelenskiiy knows this. He knows this in his worst sweaty nightmares because at a gut level the truth is unavoidable.
Terrorism against the west not inflicted by Russia but caused by the west itself, the same western hegemon who, with its notorious history of using terrorists as proxies, will be getting back some of its own medicine. Karma.
Everyone wants a just solution, and karma is the ultimate justice. I am sure Russia will do its noble, magnanimous, forgiving, Christian best to contain this menace as a favour to the west.
USUK will be the ones organising the terror, ala Crocus. Ukraine has very little agency, and as the situation deteriorates for them this will reduce even more. This is part of the neocons American century plans.
If the Russians are backing it then yes, it may come to that. My feeling is that they will be looking for a far bigger prize than some Gladio payback though.
Neither the US not the UK are successful terrorists on their own - and after this defeat they will be even less inclined, as to harbour them or provide bases and logistics will be the EU and the rump Ukraine
- the USUK have on occasion used terrorists who have turned against them, 9/11 is a classic example you would do well to remember, as would they
The Ukraine is another example - these terrorists/gangsters will invade the US, and EU, hardened by war, with the arms provided by the USUK, with refugee status, and with USUK cash to finance them
Terrorists and lunatics don't differentiate. It depends on who is paying them too. If they hate Russia enough to destroy themselves, I doubt they would think logically about who drove them to hell.
The extermination of human beings if all ages in Gaza by jews (with impunity!) has somewhat normalized all kinds of crimes against humanity, such as bombing the hospitals and maternal wards, bombing schools with children inside, and using white phosphorous while pulverizing whole blocks of high-rise buildings filled with living people. The televised Real holocaust of Palestinians should have made AIPAC dealers (and members of all major jewish organizations) into pariahs. But no! The US congresspeople are afraid to say a word against the jews-run crimes against humanity, including the mass slaughter of children (jewish fascist do this with joy). Instead, the "antisemitism bill" was produced by the American compradors propped up on the high-echelon positions of power by jewish money and jewish blackmail. The zionist owners of the collective west do not care about western civilization or any civilization for this matter. The Looters and Usurers are possessed by their greed and supremacist zeal. It is long overdue for Europeans to hunt down and lock into separate cells the EU compradors who have been feeding and weaponizing the Ukrainian neo-nazis for the expense of the basic security of the European populations.
This Korea Russia treaty is no different than the Korean War, no ? Didn't Russia and China sponsor Korea through that ? Even sending troops in ?
When Russia grabs Konstantinovka, what will they change the name to, so I can rewrite the lyrics to "You can't go back to Constantinople" and have it ready. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlO39kCQ-8
Because you're clickbaiting - there is, I'd say evidently, a world of difference between the situation leading up to the war in Korea and now, yet the proximate interests of the RF Korea and China remain valid, if in need of the recent re calibration
To say the RF will invade Turkey is merely nonsense
"Clickbaiting" What the fuck are you talking about ? Do you even know what clickbait or a troll is or you couldn't wait to use the terms somewhere ? Stay off the internet if you can't put intelligent comments together.
No I'm masturbating and no matter how much you beg, you can't watch. Do you happen to know if your mother drank or took drugs when she was carrying you ?
Anytime NATO or it's Alpha Male, the USA, goes anywhere near the Chinese or Russian border , in the case of Korea, you have both, China and Russia send troops and arms streaming in and beat the living shit out of NATO. People think the USA was fighting Koreans and Vietnamese in their respective wars but many of the troops were speaking Mandarin and the anti-aircraft batteries had Russian 'trainers". This is really no different than Ukraine.
One doesn't want 15 second nukes on their border, or for their major, or even minor, cities to be within easy range of artillery, or any other ballistic (unguided) missiles. The only thing perhaps novel about this treaty is it codifies what has always been understood and it makes Korea reciprocate with assistance. Korea will always do that anyway as their existence depends on Chinese and Russian protection and help.
Ukrainian jews can't wait to have a "land without people" to create Israel 2.0. There is a youtube-posted recording of jews singing from the roof of a jewish center in Dnipro (Menorah) about Ukraine being a "jewish land." It would be great if this ugly jewish center Menorah gets bombed to the ground.
They're freely bombing apartment buildings in Belgorod.
Putin is pretending notihng is happening. In fact, the MoD is actively hiding what is happening, by not reporting the nature of these strikes.
What makes us think that if there is an ATACMS strike on a school in Belgorod, with hundreds killed, Putin will do anything? Given past behavior? Crocus City happened, were there any consequences to anyone responsible? No. Why would it be any different?
But in that case perhaps it is indeed time for Putin to go and for someone who will do something to take the reigns.
He should do what he promised he would do -- strike "decision making centers".
That means missiles strikes on the key mansions and bunkers around Europe, as a first step.
The basic situation is the following: Western elites are fighting Russia using Ukrainian elites as a middle man and the Ukrainian working class as cannon fodder in order to subjugate Russia and steal its resources (and it could be much more sinister than that, because they might want to repopulate the land too, given where the climate crisis is headed).
What do you do in such a situation if you want to make it stop? Who do you go after? You have four options:
1) Targeted strikes to destroy the Western elites
2) Targeted strikes to destroy Ukrainian elites
3) Attrition war of extermination against the Ukrainian cannon fodder (who are really your own Russian people once the brainwashing is removed)
4) Countervalue strategic strikes against Western populations
Which one would stop the war and punish the ones responsible?
Well, of course option #3. Isn't that obvious? And definitely not the first two options...
"That means missiles strikes on the key mansions and bunkers around Europe, as a first step."
That's immediate direct war with all of NATO. Terrible idea.
"Which one would stop the war and punish the ones responsible?
Well, of course option #3. Isn't that obvious? And definitely not the first two options..."
Option 1 is the declaration of total war, which would be massively destructive to the Russian people.
Option 2 would do nothing but make those people killed martyrs. There are numerous empty suits (or empty tshirts in Zelensky's case) who would fill their shoes immediately.
It'd make better sense to target all the NATO technical (AD/drone/maintenance/repair etc) "advisers" in Ukraine, plus maybe blow up half of the CIA bases to send a message. :)
Thanks for the great article as always! I had a simple question for you or any of the knowledgeable readers - I was wondering how NK maintains such significant production capacity even in the face of all the sanctions etc that it faces? Are those sanctions just not effective, or circumvented by the ability to trade easily with Russia and China over the border? Or is it more just a matter of their priorities, being very focussed on military preparedness and industry rather than pushing resources to other things? Thank you!
The agreement in North Korea is certainly a gift to Kim. Russia can get war material and NK gets some ” protection”, dubious of what, but still protection from Russia. NK has never relaxed and is a paranoid state after the devastating war 1950-53 when millions of koreans perished.
US ”containment” policy and threats has never let them to relax. Without nukes they would have been in the same shallow grave as Khaddafi and Saddam. I doubt NK kan produce millions of shells and missiles unless Russia feeds them with food and sought after commodities. So this was good news. Putin shows the world that he can also play game. And it is what the Atlanticists want him to do - play the Evil. I hope Putin will help Cuba and Venezuela with missiles and Iran to build nukes. A shipload of nukes to Cuba will lit it all up.
All is quiet on the Eastern front comes to mind when I read the rest. Next post.
I wouldn't write off DPRK's production capabilities. It has an almost entirely homegrown defense sector and its scientific education is quite strong. It spends most of its resources on defense so not surprising they can produce this much. It would be nice to see them expanding the civlian sector hopefully with Russia's help
THE EMPIRE hasn't realised yet what "sleeping monsters" it has created by strangulating - training - the "opponent" in order to satisfy its PRIDE, GLUTTONY, SEX, ... urges and on top of that obfuscating it for themselves and their cronies by calling it "freedom, liberty and happiness" ... there is no liberty from TRUTH as GOD ALMIGHTY'S WORD clearly reveals.
The atlanticists have been playing with a magician's wand in a such stupid way that they put themselves on death row. Well done, Kagans & Bolton & private banking cartel. In the context of the ongoing and gradually heating Judea War on Russia, the warmongers have been totally oblivious to the fate of their children and grandchildren. Also, certain Ukrainians (kind of the Azovites beloved by Israelis and US congresspeople) were loudly promising to fry babies in Donbas "to a crisp." And the US/UK/EU tacitly approved the Banderites' "method." The US/UK/EU named the Banderites "freedom fighters," weaponized them and sent them hundreds of billions of dollars. Well. Now these Banderites and their "methods" are all yours, the zionized US/UK/EU. The survived Ukrainians will eventually realize what was done to their country and by whom. Hopefully, this is when Kagans & Bidens & Ursulas & Fink will be "asked questions in person" by the Ukrainians.
This is questionable due to the presence of the Ukrainian jews who still hope for jewish state 2.0. on the territory of Ukraine. It would be great if ethnic Ukrainians on the liberated territories demand the relocation of jewish shrines to either Israel or US. Remember that the putsch and civil war were heavily influenced by Straussians (American jewish fascists) and local jewish oligarchs. Kolomojsky - the president of the Jewish community of Ukraine - personally financed four (4) neo-Nazi battalions to protect his property in Donbas by murdering the civilian populations there. Hence the definition “judeo-banderites.” The Nuland-Kagan’s leading role in the maidan putsch and her open collaboration with the Ukrainian Nazi Party have demolished the shoah lies “6mln,” “gas chambers & ovens,” and the very foundation of the dirty schema of “reparations.” Israelis invited the Nazi thugs of the Azov battalion to and celebrated these followers of Stepan Bandera, (who is feted as a Hero of Ukraine by the judaized Kievan Junta). The ongoing Holocaust of the Palestinian children and women has demolished the Jewish memes the “most moral” and “most victimized.” To prevent a renewed rise of neo-nazism, Ukrainians and Russians should remove and ban all jewish organizations on the territory of Ukraine. The judaic/ talmudic education produces psychotic haters of genocidal kind; see all major jewish organizations in the North America approving the ongoing genocide in Gaza. The indoctrinated zionists are enemies of humanity
F-16 Turns 50 Special: What It Takes To Become A Viper Pilot (https://theaviationist.com/2024/01/21/viper-pilot-training/) ...and that is assuming the trainees speak english. Then, of course, the UA will not be getting the latest models. It will be the junk.
NATO logistics are a disaster. For example, the swiss Gotthard Pass rail tunnel is not fully used because DE and IT have not modernized their RR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Pass). Estonia has abandoned "Rail Baltica". The project to standardize RR gauges in the Baltics.
The anal retentive brits are always great with their terror stories. eg "attacking children." And boulevard press like the german BILD (https://www.bild.de/) and EXPRESS (https://www.express.co.uk/) appeal to the great unwashed and not much else.
Thanks for these reports - F-16: I understand maintenance crews and spare parts and logisitics and weapons suites are far from finalised, let alone suitable airfields with adequate fuel supplies and electricity
Plus due to late deliveries of the F-35's some countries (Denmark...) wish to keep their F-16s until
The Balts are indeed on the other side of the looking glass - Latvia let their rail network to ruin, along with supporting industries - they nowq rely entirely on RF goodwill to repair their ailing coaches engines and so on
F16 needs AWACS target vectoring and mid air refuelers to be effective. Fine when the other side has no Electronic Warfare, air-to-air/surface-to-air missiles or air force
A discussion of some of the most relevant considerations —
It is effectively impossible to base F-16s in Ukraine. The available runways are woefully deficient, and any aircraft remaining at one base for more than a single sortie are going to become a target of Russian strikes, along with the base infrastructure.
The Ukrainian air force has only managed to retain a handful of airframes to this point in time by assiduously hiding them, and constantly moving them around, using improvised airfields much of the time (highways, grass fields, etc.) The sortie rate of the remaining UAF aircraft is so small as to be nearly invisible. Indeed, with few exceptions, if they fly, they die.
But at least Soviet-era jets were designed and constructed to fly out of "guerrilla airfields". F-16s are not. F-16s require pristine runways and intensive maintenance after each sortie — almost 20 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight time!!!
This means highly trained / exceedingly experienced NATO ground crews and fully equipped maintenance hangars would need to be available anywhere the F-16 seeks to fly — along with an abundant supply of spare parts, spare engines, etc.
That simply is not going to happen in Ukraine.
‼️ This means the only plausible basing option will be at NATO facilities in Poland and/or Romania. And anyone attempting to argue against this reality is engaging in pure fantasy.
And, of course, flying F-16s against Russia from bases in Poland and/or Romania is tantamount to a formal declaration of WAR.
But let's assume NATO chooses that option ...
First, we need to consider what the mission of these F-16s will be. Is it to launch with long-range cruise missiles, rise to high altitude, and fire them from distant stand-off range? Because, as I understand it, the F-16 cannot carry, for example, a British Storm Shadow missile. The F-16 is not well-suited for the long-range stand-off role.
Furthermore, an F-16 at altitude over Ukraine is going to be seen by Russian AD assets from hundreds of miles away, and Russian air to air missiles and S-400 SAMs will outrange the F-16s capability to defend itself in almost any scenario.
Additionally, the Russians have clearly demonstrated the capability to routinely shoot down any stand-off munition NATO has launched against them.
I don't see how an F-16 mission to launch long-range stand-off strikes against Russian targets is going to produce any meaningful tactical successes, let along appreciable strategic effects. And I am certain it would only take the Russians a day or two to formulate highly effective ambushes against this tactic. Each subsequent F-16 sortie would then become a one-way kamikaze attack.
As for close-air support (CAS) of ground troops or combat air patrol (CAP) against Russian attack aircraft, there is simply no way the F-16 can accomplish either of those missions without readily available in-air refueling! And that is simply not going to happen over Ukraine. NATO's big, fat, slow tankers will be shot out of the sky at will by the Russians! There is no way of getting around that reality.
Moreover, from the moment the first F-16 commences an attack sortie from a NATO airfield, all NATO ISR assets in the theater will become targets. They will either cease to fly, or cease to exist. And, without them, the F-16 is no longer a useful tool.
Neither F-16s, nor any variety of NATO strike aircraft, are made to function in isolation from the huge logistical infrastructure that supports them. Therefore, the very sentence "Send F-16s to Ukraine" is a logically nonsensical statement.
Simply put, I cannot conceive of ANY way F-16s can be used against Russian forces in Ukraine, even if the latest generation of F-16 Vipers were being flown by experienced NATO pilots.
And, quite frankly, the same limitations would apply to ANY variety of NATO strike aircraft attempting to fly against the Russian military in its own backyard.
If the policy makers of the #EmpireAtAllCosts cult succeed in initiating an air war against Russia in eastern Europe, it will result in catastrophic losses for US/NATO air power and the comprehensive destruction of the myth of US military supremacy.
They're not supposed to be used against Russian forces, they're going to bomb Russian cities, refineries, power stations etc. While operating from NATO airfields, you're absolutely right about that.
? You are talking about F-16's - taking off from extreme western Ukraine, at best, if not further out....They have an operational range of 500k max....how are they going to get to bomb inside Russia?
You should know at least something of what you are writing about - but even so read S and read the comments above - try and investigate
I'm telegraphing the consensus on the topic from Russia actually. F-16s won't pull off dogfights, they'll be too few and underpowered for that. Maybe an ambush or two, or spreading out missiles with active homing in the general direction of a target in hope that the warhead finds something to lock on at the final stage. Their main role is to deploy 300-500 km air-to-surface missiles, which Ukraine's Joint Force Commandes literally said in February. Additional target guidance is expected from Swedish ASC-890 that were given to Ukraine but will operate from behind NATO border and other sources.
Minor point: actually NATO militaries in Nato nations have been training Ukrainian pilots to speak English long before F-16 deliveries were mooted or agreed. Of course there are other problems, but that seems unlikely to be one of them. ;)
The strength, resourcefulness, manufacturing capacity and technological prowess of DPRK has long been underestimated. Its involvement in the Middle East has been extensive and its impact profound. Much of Iran's technological military capability can be attributed to DPRK--as can the engineering of its impenetrable underground fortresses. DRPK has been providing extensive military and technical training and support to Syria for decades. And Hezbollah's tight organizational structure and iron discipline are both products of its relationship with North Korea. For those interested in details, the sections on Syria, Iran and Hezbollah in A.B.Abrams' "Immovable Object" are a good start. Russia has found a very tough and capable ally. Their potential contributions to Russia's military capacity are significant. It's easy to see why Vlad paid them a visit.
Thank you for the reference - which would be a useful basis for "resolving" anything. But of course gender, affirmation.... are so much more convenient.
It's hard to see why it took him quite so long - except that he waited until the Joint Declaration made it clear that RF and China strategic interests are inseperable
This will also provide some relief for the long suffering population of Nth K
I think Putin has been disappointed by the level of support from China. Can't support that statement with anything other than reading his expressions during his China visit.
I do know he had hoped to get a deal done on a second fuel line, Power of Siberia 2, but it didn't happen. China may feel it needs to horde its resources and its oil use has dropped. There is also the nasty possibility that China would love to acquire some Russian territory in exchange for any help or who knows what else. Again I am speculating, but IMO Putin did not look happy.
His disappointment may have made his NK agreements more in-depth than he would have liked. Not because he doesn't value the relationship, not because he doesn't respect their abilities, not that he doesn't hold Kim in high regard for his accomplishments, but because Kim is potentially volatile.
And with good reason; Kim has every justification to be sick to death of 70 plus years of US mistreatment, and now SK is once again being super annoying. Kim with a bear at his back just might pop off and create a war on yet another front for Russia.
A positive possibility could come out of all of this; NK "boots on the ground" in Ukraine. Now if I was NATO and I saw, say 100,000 North Koreans show up armed to the teeth, I might push for a deal. For behind that 100,000 are about 6 million more and all of them are as annoyed at the West as is Kim.
The JD with China is an exhaustive document detailing collaboration in every area – between a country at war and one trying to avoid war, both finding this distinction useful to eachother, but requiring a great deal of prudent application
The levels at which the two are currently operating are distinct – RF is engaged (Ukraine) in an open ended operation which has no clear conclusion; China the reverse, engaged (Taiwan) in a fight against time which has no possible conclusion they are prepared to accept
China is even more rigid autonomous patient and determined that the RF, but the nature of each predicament requires the multipolar solution, which in turns imposes flexibility and concessions
These are difficult to operate in time of war or pre war- hence the importance of the RF NK agreements, this eliminates one source of urgency and stress
The counter party will be some kind of agreement in the Ukraine/Europe
Nonetheless – no smiles: remember the smiles VVP GWB fishing in Maine? Paddling round the cattle in Texas? Who needs smiles
There are many other levels in which there are clear distinctions between the two – reconciling these by application of new norms and principles is the essence of multipolar, and of the JD, very much more difficult to construct than a temporary alliance or understanding that appears useful or even equable until it does not
True, the meetings appear to have been deadly serious. But they did have fun, and did exchange gifts, neat ones at that. Here are some videos and memes re one of the gifts, a Russian limo.
I was writing about the JD - this very serious, as are Xi and the Chinese leadership
The countries are in rather different positions and with somewhat different priorities and strengths- these need a lot work to parallelise or harmonise
Here VVP is, for once, slightly out of his depth - The CCP apparatus is overwhelming
NK is easy - now the JD has allowed general agreements for two rather natural allies who both have long experience of war - it is clear that this is a liberation for NK and deeply felt
Hence the boys in cars smiles
I sent this photo to some who have little reason for sympathy for either one, and plan to send to others
I agree, China is a very different Partner with a top priority to avoid entanglements, they still need the West. NK is a. "just say the word" kind of ally. A refreshing change for Putin I am sure.
And for NK, Russia's recognition and partnership taken to a new level is Heaven sent.
Happy to hear you had a chance to check the links, I do love the video of them driving around laughing.
In 2004 when I lived in Bangkok I knew someone (a Pommie) who was a commercial agent of NK products. Textiles, gems, minerals, machinery, military vehicles and equipment, and more, all home grown. The coloured brochures were very eye opening.
Considering every building was destroyed by the Great Satan in early fifties, and they have had evil food shortages imposed on them, the sanctions, the provocations, the sabotage, the biological warfare, etc it's amazing what the North Koreans have done.
It seems to me that several automatic translators refuse to translate СВО properly. E.g., in "the importance of the defense industry is growing rapidly. We not only equip our soldiers in the Northern Military District" it could be the NMD, but it's probably the SMO. There are instances where it is obvious that it's the SMO. I wonder if Google and Twitter would be penalized if its automatic translators translated СВО properly.
According to Wikipedia, the NMD was recently incorporated into the Leningrad Military District.
I have long considered the DPRK to be the most likely route for Chinese military assistance to Russia.
Fuel, metals, chemicals and technicians from Beijing to Pyongyang become weapons and munitions from Pyongyang to Moscow.
There is a long history of nations scrubbing or sanitizing weapons to try and conceal their origins, but the further upstream in the industrial process the more effective that sanitizing would be. Train loads of semi-finished gun parts would be considered military aid, but train loads of scrap iron and coal would not be.
All of this looks suspiciously coordinated, to contrast the knee jerk reactionary plans the west throws out every other week.
Here is Asia, the Russian moves are basically to pin down two major blocks that the US was counting on to counter Russia and China :
1) "Modernizing" North Korea pins down Japan and South Korea, with the potential for direct strikes against their metropolitan areas. This again sucks up more demand for scarce US interceptors and missiles, which the US would ideally want to position around Taiwan - remember the "hellscape" the US promised to turn the Taiwan Strait into? Yeah, it can't do that if the Chinese can light up anything they want with their rockets. Let us also not forget that South Korea is, constututionally, prohibited from sending arms to a warzone, something the current government could ignore with a fig leaf excuse, but if a North Korean threat starts to become more credible, those million shell shipments to Ukraine become a major point of contention.
2) Drawing Vietnam into BRICS further compromises any ideas of a 'South East Asian Nato' to counter and strangle China, which was previously heavily courted by the US, including proposals to open a US naval base in Ha Long Bay. This further splits the regional bloc, ASEAN, with the heavyweights of Vietnam and Indonesia turning towards BRICS, and leaving the Philippines the lone beacon of US policy in the region.
Right!? Moment I heard of it, and thought of Kim, the song "Centerfield" started playing in my head, you GO KIM!!!
"Well, beat the drum and hold the phone - the sun came out today!
We're born again, there's new grass on the field.
A-roundin' third, and headed for home, it's a brown-eyed handsome man;
Anyone can understand the way I feel.
Oh, put me in, Coach - I'm ready to play today;
Put me in, Coach - I'm ready to play today;
Look at me, I can be Centerfield."
It seems the march to war continues. The teams are lining up, and with DPRK on board the Eurasians are looking very strong. Once the war in Lebanon begins it will be much clearer who is positioned where. Troubled times indeed.
The Russians are now assuming postures of their own to counter the chronic western posturing. It is a war of posturing now. We have been here before. It will all dissolve after November.
Thucydides ghost may have a different viewpoint.
You never step in the same water twice- Heraclitus.
I am sure, and I very much hope, that the security and other arrangements with North Korea, are more serious well thought through, motivated and intended, than 'a war of posturing' - especially one in response to various vacuous western theatrics
I would attribute more weight to the evident intent of the China RF Joint Declaration to lay the bases for a multipolar world
NK is mentioned in this document - and it is right and fitting that this VVP visit and agreements with NK, are the first fruit thereof
It is clear that NK is a serious consideration for them both, as NK is indeed for Iran and for other West Asia resistance to the USNATO
It is time to put paid to the frozen war in the Koreas, and to the long effective occupation of Japan - both these countries, despite a smatter of commercial success are undergoing degrees of social & political decline and degradation that is outmatched only by the US
Going by the expressions on the faces of both sides in the meeting photo above, I think their meetings were dead serious. I doubt there was even a nanosecond of posturing.
Totally agree with you on the Koreas and Japan!
They are firming up the Eastern front, no doubt remembering the Japanese adventurism they both suffered from in 1905!
Very sensible of them, especially given Bidens "Squad" program, enjoining the US, Australia, New Zealand and Japan as comrades in arms for some future misery.
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/you-will-be-tagged-and-you-will-love-it Did simplicius talk about Igor Ashmanov objection to biometrics while russian officials are all for it? Why is ppl here keeping on heaping the RU+CN vs West retheoric? or it is more like an elites one-world-world of RU+CN+US+EU against common ppl?
It's always against the people - but that does not mean the ruling class does not get to fight with eachother, using the workers to do so
+ some ruling class really much worse than other ruling class
The road to hell may be paved with good intentions; but the express train to the apocalypse is built out of corrupt officials who honestly believe the worst can’t happen.
How can one be corrupt and honest at the same time?
They are paid to.
To be paid to perform the impossible makes the impossible possible?
See Zelensky for details...
The officials are chosen by money based on the bullshit they are willing to believe. See Zelenskyy.
"Dissolve" is one word for it.....
March to war? A war can only be fought between two sides. There is Russia, China, Iran, North Korea etc. on one side. Where is the other side?
The Hegemon never sleeps. I can guarantee there is no underestimation on the opposite side. They are well aware of the historical patterns at play. It is rare for a declining Hegemon to retire on some tropical island. And the US is a particularly nasty variety of hegemon. The Ukrainian threats to target schools says it all. USUK are the terror empires.
The Issue with the US is they have never had conflict on their soil. The immigrant population has never been tested on their patriotism in bad times. The otherside is made up of nations that have been invaded and destroyed. So for them the history is not a narrative, but reality that has been lived. Terror states, that have made many enemies and have exposed populations it must be considered that every game, two can play at it. Its good to live in a glass house and throw stones when you neighbours want a peaceful life and will not react. What happens when the neighbour becomes fed up and throws one stone back?
Maybe I'm mistaken but are you suggesting someone will attempt an invasion of the US?
Was the original statement about the invasion of any country? I thought you were referring to terrorism. The US is protected by two oceans and has strategic depth from all approaches. Why exactly would any nation want to invade the US in an age of intercontinental ballistic missile with the ability to carry up to 20 hypersonic nuclear tipped glide vehicles with 100 mega tonne war heads each?
"The US is protected by two oceans and has strategic depth from all approaches."
No, wrong, Hypersonics and nuclear powered Russian Burevestnik can reach wherever they want.
Lavrov and others have stated the oceans are no longer a barrier.
@Seeker
Re: "intercontinental ballistic missile with the ability to carry up to 20 hypersonic nuclear tipped glide vehicles with 100 mega tonne war heads each"
Oh ya, sure, you betcha, kiddo! Those Rooskies can put TWENTY (full yield variants) Tsar Bomba size warheads on a single ICBM, all carried by hypersonic glide vehicles...
Nope. Go look at the physics package dimensions of a 100 MT device. Hell, just look at the MASS of nuclear materials calculated at highest ever reported efficiency. I started on the back of a napkin, but it got so reDACulous I couldn't finish...
Regardless, one small nuclear weapons paired with a modern highly accurate delivery system will ruin your whole day, the inevitable escalation after any such will ruin EVERYONE'S EVER AFTER.
The US has already been invaded by 48 million illegials, facilitated by a President whose son received millions from China according to his now VP.
The majority of these arrivals are military aged men, 120,000 of whom are Chinese military according to JJ Carrell's sources. https://jjcarrell.substack.com/p/border-truth-new-york-city
And according to John O'Looney's sources, a large portion of the remainder are trained and waiting for orders to act in the UK and presumably in the US.
https://rumble.com/v25epjh-john-olooney-black-watch-troops-have-told-me-this-is-the-plan-....html
An invading army of millions would easily take down the US infrastructure prior to any war, the US would be a sitting duck. Would missiles be necessary, yes to take out key US centers, but then again if the current US govt is in on the plan, perhaps not.
We are in great peril IMO. I do hope to be wrong.
You cant argue or discuss with some of the idiots in this forum. They distort what you write and answer questions never asked. I agree with you.
no one will invade the US as your correspondant points out - why bother
But the invasion of the illegals will continue to grow as the US continues to fall apart and fail
Yankland has long failed and fallen apart.. The elites have managed to conceal this from the proverbial man and woman in the streets..
You don't see the illegials as an invasion? Sincere question.
That is if you think a barrage of ICBM's are an invasion...
I'm afraid that the invasion of the US has already happened with 100's of thousands of Chinese that poured across the southern border. It looks like they came via Ecuador, who just shut down their Chinese visas because of 'irregularities'. Now that they are in the US, the Chinese illegals are waiting for the go ahead.
@Mordac
Crazy xenophobic people in USA back between WWI and WWII used to write whole books about how the perfidious Niponese had already inserted their evil slant eyed yellow skinned invading forces AND all required equipment to take the entire western USA in a surprise attack, these wiley Asians only waiting for a secret signal from their emperor... There is nothing new under the (rising?) sun.
What are your opinions of AIPAC?
Your assumption here is that the thousands of Chinese individuals arriving in the US are part of some highly coordinated "sleeper agent" operation, but I don't see any reason to believe this rather than the more plausible explanation that they simply want to live in America. As the other comment above indicates, this sort of behavior is not new in the US, and has previously been directed at Germans and Japanese immigrants. But the reality is that America is attractive for a large number of people around the world, regardless of whether you think because of the US being the true home of the "virtuous and free", or simply because of it merely presenting a gaudy facade of nihilistic consumerism.
Of course---compare the age of the US (248 yrs old) to China or Russia or Iran or any Korea.... Why would the US or here in Canada (157 yrs) have that. Yes Israel is different (76 yrs) but it is not an organic country-- it was imposed in an already established area. The only conflict the US had recently was the self imposed (with help from Israel) 9-11.
"Never had conflict on their soil" - you are ignoring history
The original Mayflower settlers were at war from the start with the original original settlers before them - this is still unfinished and ongoing
They then imported slave labour
They then fought between themselves (Civil War) both sides importing proxies to do the dirty work
They (the ruling class descendants of the Mayfowers and their inducted identity allies) now say they are once again importing slave labour to do their labouring and their fighting for them, except it is likely these inductees will be used against the descendants of those long ago imported proxies who are no longer of use, either fighting or labouring
Well you are also forgetting the war of 1812 when the capital was burned. My anology was more intended to imply a test of the new immigrant population that came after those early wars.
To provide an exhaustive list of every incident would indeed be ....how to be polite about this.. impossible..perhaps
You did start by saying the the US never had a conflict on their soil - when it would correct to say that the US has never seen a day without
To try to be polite : there have been many continual and continuous conflicts in the US, since the day those brit exile ships landed
Blame it on the brits, why not, the rest of us, RoW, all do
USUK are captives of Zionists and Neocon Jews. Jews and the CIA killed President Kennedy in 1963 and the USA will not return to a Republic until Israel is eliminated.
No one loves an ex-hegemon, least of all those who paid for the hegemon's exorbitant privilege
In my humble opinion the so called Hegemon shat his pants while mumbling nonsense right before the world to see on a giant stage. We are already in the stage of multi polarity, and that means of course lots of long wars. Unless there is a economic collapse of a couple of big Western nations including the US, Germany, France and the UK, and if that happens, we will probably have peace and no big wars for a long time.
There seems to be some mismatches with the numbers.
The Russians appear to be using far less artillery than they are producing and sourcing
On the other hand, armored vehicles are so consumable now that you could produce 10,000 and it wouldn't be enough. The drone problem applies to both sides; just as Abrams and Leopards have fallen to them, so have T-90's and T-80's.
Air defense systems & anti-drone systems are the innovations that are sorely needed on both sides. I suspect the Chinese already have something on the drone side
agreed. Drones are key. Sure the Russians are improving their both their drone and counter drone capabilities but they are not as significant as tank production from an industrial point of view.
The RF is re building stocks...nand the Nth K will help...the shells will be fired
Well now the S. Koreans are going to join the war effort overtly. Should go well!
They have been involved all this time, it's a matter of leveling the scale if nothing else.
How usage numbers correlate with production numbers? And even then S numbers are way off. I don't know which sources he uses, but he underestimate artillery shell production 5x times and T90s were in production non stop, not just recently. Russia have bottomless pit of tanks to use and modernize, don't you worry.
Stockpiling for the coming war with the US.
That war will last 2 weeks. It will go nuclear almost immediately.
@Bash
More like 2 days.
I watched the movie Threads last week, it reminded me how completely fucking crazy this all is
It’s like watching some sci-fi insanely stupid march to nuclear war. Now the nuclear initiative belongs to Kim Jong Un. Think about that.
In one corner, Kim, in the other, Biden. At least Biden isn't actually in charge
On the sort of plus side, there is no possibility Kim bluffs. So if Kim says he is going to act, duck.
Why bluffing seems to be the US/NATO take on Putin, I will never know, I guess sanity is an incredibly undervalued leadership quality in the West.
The movie "Threads" is old school, typically UK underestimation of what would happen. For example, they grossly underestimate the number of nukes that will detonate over the UK and they leave too many people still alive. The UK is a very small region with much of the population densely packed into urban areas (even more so in modern times). A Russian strike today would kill 95% of the population.
An analogous nuclear war movie for the US is "The Day After." But that, too, underestimates what would happen even though it features strikes on the Kansas City region, with many strikes on silos. It only shows a single nuke hitting Kansas City (leaving the university and medical center on the outskirts intact) when in reality there would be around a dozen strikes neatly tiling the area.
Those classic movies also don't show what will happen to all of the US's vassals in the event of a strategic exchange. Russia will strike every country that went along with US sanctions, which seized Russian vessels or which in any other way committed acts of war against Russia, such as providing weapons to Kiev.
For example, the self-satisfied imbeciles in New Zealand think they'll be safe in a nuclear conflict that eradicates the Northern Hemisphere but in reality around a dozen Russian nukes will strike them to ensure 95% of their population is incinerated. Same with Australia, South Korea, Japan (of course), Fiji (they seized a Russian vessel), Switzerland, and so on. Anybody who thinks Russia is going to let the West kill over half of Russia's population without Russia wiping out every vassal and ally of the West in return is nuts. When the nukes start flying payback will come knocking on every vassal's door.
There was a Putin interview a month or two ago, in Russian, where it was I think the only time I got a glimpse of what would happen. He was going on about threats to the Russian state and various scenarios, but then, in a moment, he said something along the lines of "if the worst were to happen, it would be an unbelievable tragedy, and Russia would be destroyed. But then, if you ask me what I would do, I would ask you, what is the point of a world without russia?"
And the look on his face said it all - if you think you can destroy us, I promise to take you all to hell with me. It was his most Russian moment ever, in contrast to the usual measured style we are used to.
I'm paraphrasing a bit as I can't recall the interview exactly, just as a clarifier
Lordy Lordy....I hope you are script writing rather than making any reality based forecasts
The RF populations are as aware as any of their ruling class, as aware as VVP, of the perils
It seems, from the chitwhat, that the westies are less so
I hope you remember that we had a brief discussion about the generalised world wide reduction in fertility rates
Due, as I averred, to capitalism, with the only exceptions to this reduction being therefore in countries where persisted the traditional ways of life, if possible pre agricultural – such as Central Africa
I found this comment in a China blog, discussing the China gvmt policy – and hope it might interest you
It appeared to me to lend a modern formulation and structure to those policies which, otherwise, may seem a little neo traditionalist, too reliant on reviving of the old ways of living
This criticises quite severely the lazy laissez faire doctrine displayed by a recent article in The Economist
Let me know what you think…..
https://ccgupdate.substack.com/cp/145763671
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2024/05/23/why-paying-women-to-have-more-babies-wont-work
I hope that your 95% revision of the "Threads" scenario is correct, and that it refers to immediate rather than lingering deaths. My nightmare is my or any of my family's being in the 5%. When it looked like Hilary Clinton was likely to be elected and start WW3, we talked of arranging some painless method of group self-deletion in case we survived the initial strike. But it would be much better not to have to bother.
Alois Irlmaier predicted everything flawlessly until today. According to him, it will last 3,5 months. It is really worthwhile to read his predictions.
The apparent drone threat to tanks plays to Russian advantage.
Why?
Drones made it possible to reliably mission-kill a tank using SMALLER warhead than other weapons use (arty, ATGMs), because they made it very easy to hit the right spot of the tank.
And what that leads to?
The vast majority of "destroyed" tanks (the same applies to other vehicles, even unarmored) suffer very light damage in the process. While yes, they're out of the fight, they're relatively easily to repair, or reuse.
And Russia has far larger capacity to recover and repair armored vehicles than the other side. And typically, they're easier to repair than western vehicles, making the hill for the West even steeper.
That's a really good point. It's all mission kills, not outright destruction
It's one of the classic military planning dilemmas Soviets/Russian military school of thought talks about a lot.
And it explains a lot about the difference between a typical West/NATO/US militaries and Eastern Front of WW2/Warsaw Pact/Soviet/Russian ones.
While western planners are trying to make it harder to lose an asset (which gets expensive, hard to make and ends up not even being well protected), Russians simply assume the enemy will always find a way to kill it, so their plan revolves about recovering the lost asset as easily as possible.
The easier it is to recover that asset, the easier it is to generate new fighting force or recover the old one. That is by the way why most western conflicts are planned to be short and intense (and then end up being long anyway, but that's another matter) while Russians don't seem to be in a hurry.
It leads to very weird paradoxes: if you have two sides (A and B) and they both start with 100 tanks, it's entirely possible for A to kill more tanks than B, but B wins the fight with more tanks intact.
Wars of attrition can be very confusing 😅😅😅
Thank you
The West has adopted the Nazi Germany school of having a limited number of high value platforms. It didn't work for them, why the West would think it wise is hard to fathom. It's not even cheaper.
The expectation during the Cold War was that if the attack into West Germany ever happened, nukes would be necessary to stop the Soviets. There was wishful thinking but that was the bottom line. There would never be enough soldiers and weaponry to stop the Soviet forces in time. I'm not that old. I don't understand why that was forgotten.
The problem with ColdnWar rhetoric is that the Eastern bloc's western part had next to no means to conduct an invasion. No heavy MLRS, cheap tanks, only a few tactical ballistic missiles, no bombers whatsoever and only a few fighter-bombers which were of low capability sort. If the Soviets intended to attack, they'd need to visibly prepare for a long time, which would give plenty of time for the West to prepare.
The second point is, that perhaps it's not the West adopting Nazi Germany school of thought, but rather Nazi Germany adopting a colonial mindset and trying to fight a war of attrition with it. It existed before - virtually all colonial empires were built upon forces relatively low in numbers but with big technological superiority. Nazis problem was that their technological superiority was quite small and in some cases didn't even exist. They lost the naval conflict war against navies with superior numbers but almost matching them technologically. They were winning the air war right until the enemy reached technological parity and then lost because the enemy pulled ahead in numbers. They lost the land war because their thought they have big technological superiority, but in reality their superior forces were really small and everywhere else the enemy matched them technologically and eventually curbstomped them in numbers.
They lost in WW2 for the same reasons colonial empires lost some of their colonial wars.
My point was that the counterexample was obvious after WWII. V-weapons, boutique tanks and overengineered firearms were unable to stand against cheap mass production of 'good enough' weaponry. So why would you go back to making boutique weapons, sitting in the West? The whole MIC complex in the US is devoted to making such overengineered and expensive weapons.
Germany rearmed on the basis of a small mobile force - about 1/10th of their army, later expanding to 1/5th - and the remainder being horse drawn WWI equivalents as you note. Then expedient after expedient was tried to restore technological superiority to that slice of the army, particularly after it was realized that the Soviet armor was better than the German stuff in 1941. There really wasn't any significant technological advantage in the air or at sea, even early on. Bismarck wasn't all that much better than the opposing capital ships, aside from being new. The German planes of the early war were equivalents of the opposing Allied aircraft, nothing more.
But what I really speak of is the late war situation where small numbers of very expensive armor were constructed and StG-44 weapons were in use. Having 500 King Tigers vs 4k IS-2s and innumerable Shermans and T-34s wasn't very helpful. And for all the complaints that the StG-44 wasn't well made, it required a lot more effort to build than PPS/PPSh submachine guns and it showed in how ubiquitous they were.
The colonial wars were the way they were because the technology of rapid firing weapons, armored ships and then aircraft hadn't hit the 'global south' locations, so the wars were like that, cakewalks. The tables had turned by the 1950s.
Interestingly, the UK *alone* outproduced Germany and German-occupied Europe between 1939-1941 in aircraft, in respect of which the UK already had reached technological parity. Hitler, as a populist leader, always tried to go for butter rather than guns - until he started having to gear up to a war economy from 1942, by which time it was waaay too late. ;).
Indeed. Eisenhower introduced the system whereby any conflict anywhere in the world between Russian and US forces larger than a single battalion would automatically trigger general nuclear war - including a first strike taking out Russia, China and every other nation that was preplanned to be treated as a hostile power even if it wasn't, plus of course Western Europe in fallout. The reason for that was purely fiscal policy, for the reasons you've described. It remains to be seen if the USA's doctrine has become more nuanced since then. ;)
Not all, it's become bon-ton to visit crippled war engines with a grenade drop or two to make sure they ignite properly. It helps that the crew usually leaves hatches open.
It's looking bad, chief. Commentators are using War Thunder stats. More allies are being armed and called in. Southeast Asia is beginning to pop like movie theater popcorn because both the US (through the Philippines, just look at the straight China coverage we have) and China (so many sea incidents) are upping the temperature even more than the new Taiwan government.
I guess there is a lot more positioning going on we don't know about. They are all waiting till the US election. If Biden pulls off a return of the zombie the temperature will dial up big time.
I suspect that it doesn't matter much who is in charge, the bureaucracy is hard committed. I hope it's not so.
The bureautrash are not the deciding class - it is the dominant capitalist class who decides
I think a lot of the bureautrash are their kids and nephews and nieces - and I think for many of the biggest ones, their interests are also served by a little bit of popping off.
A lot of popping off, maybe not so much unless the boltholes are ready. Parachuting into board positions in China or bugout bunkers in NZ, staying back to loot the farmland and other necessities, there's probably already a plan in place.
Only the very stupid ones who can not get real jobs
The dominants have been very, very, successful come rain or shine for two hundred years, in this current iteration
They are not going to destroy the golden goose
Nor is their idea of success living in a cave
To use this war to destroy some more of the States and render it even more supine - to consolidate a deal with China and Asia - yes, and by so doing gain access to and peace with Russia
Prepping the nest? I'd do the same. Shame they ruined a good thing, but I suppose that's what you do if you want more of everything forever.
No, abc. I think the direction will be dissolution of all this hysteria either way. If Biden wins he no longer has to adopt electioneering postures and neither do his teams.
I'd bet my family that Biden will not be running in the next election, rather Newsome.
red and blue are the same color
pedo joe's opponent is no prize
the country is rudderless
the best one can hope for is a total financial collapse
...and a "civil war" as already scripted and presented to the braindead masses in the less than blockbuster movie titled...
The real driving force behind all this geopolitical movement towards war lies at a higher level, IMO.
The multinational corporate and banking world is drowning in debt and derivative obligations. There is only one way for them to get out of it – declare force majeure. However, this can only be done in extraordinary circumstances – like a world war. So beyond Gaza/Ukraine/Taiwan, the hidden forces are working to bring the world to war once more so they can get out from under the debt. Will it escalate to nuclear war? Will these PTB be able to confine this pending war to conventional weapons? That is the big question.
I agree that the western imperialists are burdened with a crushing unplayable levels of non productive debt but a nuclear war would kill the goose that lays the golden egg. As deranged as many of their strategist are I feel that the ruling class will hesitant to go down such a road as there is no going back and nothing to rule over once you go nuclear.
You talk like a rational person, but I'm not convinced. These people have little or no connection with the real world of real people. They live in a cocoon of fantasy. And many of them actually believe the West can win a nuclear war. And those who don't believe they have the power to keep a world war restricted to conventional weaponry. Both camps are completely bought into their respective fantasies.
It's like those who believe they can kill off 90% of the world's population and still enjoy a high standard of living afterwards in a world of no industry, no agriculture, no services - because the armies of little people who worked in those sectors are no longer alive.
Modern technology require large populations - the lower your population, the lower your available technology.
"You talk like a rational person, but I'm not convinced"
LOL! I'm sure that sentence, which could be construed as an insult, was just clumsily expressed! :):):)
On review, I see your point. Apologies to Myra for my clumsiness.
Derivatives are typically a zero-sum game.
You mean if Trump were to get selected he would down the temperature? 🤣 MAGA is all about dialing up the temperature, whether economically or militarily. Trump would make Joe "Genocide" Biden look like a peace dove.
If history is any indication there will be a hiatus as happened in 2016. It takes time to recalibrate between administrations, even if the deep state motors along regardless. My gut feeling is that Trump would dial down the hot war with Russia and pivot to China and Iran. Trump and NATO don't seem to mix well. The aggressive foreign posture is in the US DNA. No leader would dial down the rhetoric. To Trump's credit, he did negotiate an end to the Afghan debacle and pushed for detente with the DPRK.
I don't believe Trump was ever anti-NATO - that is a notion shared by many people, but it simply is not true. He was only pissed off that the Europeans were not contributing their fair share and that if they didn't ante up, he would leave the organisation - that was merely to pile pressure on them. And it worked.
I think he saw the defense of Europe as Europe's problem. He wanted good relations with Russia, which is why he was subjected to charges of being a Russian agent.
Trump did not negotiate an end to the Afghan debacle, he wanted to get hold of the alleged $1 trillion worth of its natural resources in the ground.
Furthermore, if there had been a negotiated end, the U.S. would not have left in a Vietnam redux fashion.
If Afghanistan really were about natural resources (it isn't), the obvious thing to do is to cut a deal with the Taliban.
Sort of like with the Saudis. For that matter, Saddam would have been thrilled to be able to sell oil freely on global markets for dollars. The US didn't let him - remember the "oil for food" program?
> If Afghanistan really were about natural resources (it isn't), the obvious thing to do is to cut a deal with the Taliban.
Trump is always going on about cutting deals, but how good is he at it? I have my doubts coming from a loud mouth like him.
He did negotiate an end to the war, and had set a date for troop withdrawal.
Biden blew off the date, and then ended up not only leaving the equipment behind, which Trump would not have done, but getting troops killed in the process.
If Trump would have been really interested to end the war he would have withdrawn the troops during his administration, and not set a date for after his administration.
Trump knows as no other that agreements can be reneged on, esp. by the Americans. proof: the JCPOA, which the U.S. (thanks to our hero Trump) unilaterally withdrew on despite there being proof verified by the IAEA AND the U.S. itself that Iran was sticking to the agreement.
Blaming the Afghan withdrawal mess on Biden is a very weak excuse invented by Trumpists to let him off the hook. Not that Biden is any better, of course.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States%E2%80%93Taliban_deal&diffonly=true
From that Wikipedia article: "...the agreement did not involve the then Afghan government. The deal, which also had secret annexes, was one of the critical events that caused the collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces."
* Typical U.S. arrogance to leave the Afghan government out.
* Secret annexes — serious stuff must be in there. Nefarious stuff? Nothing would surprise me.
* caused the collapse of the Afghan National Security Forces: what an achievement, Mr. Trump.
"Vietnam redux" - ROFL! :):):)
Trump is weak, stupid and easily manipulated. Note that I wrote not a word in praise of Halfwit Joe Biden.
We're in agreement.
Yet no new wars were started nor escalated during his Presidency. Trump is about trade, business, the return of industry to the US, he is not about war.
Drumpf had no qualms bombing civilians in Syria and Yemen. He is the Zionist's bitch.
Trump was in a box, he had no control over his military, they lied to him, prevented him from getting information. He had the FBI, CIA, DOD, Pentagon all against him.
Who knows if he ordered those strikes? Who knows what he was told if he did? Remember when he was meeting with Xi and he was told that Soleimani had been killed? Xi was furious and left the next day. Whatever deals Trump was working on with Xi were toast.
Why would Trump do that? I don't think he did, I think the order was given and Trump was told about it after the fact. It is a distinct possibility. To save face Trump said he ordered it. Yes he may have, but to have it happen while Xi was there?
It makes no sense.
Drumpf has bragged many times re assassinating Soleimani .It's foolish to place any faith in the Zionist blowhard.
Correct !
Stop fabricating excuses for that loser !!
Trump is about the return of industry to the U.S.: absolute nonsense. he did nothing to bring back industry, nothing.
But he did. I am not trying to change your mind it is clearly made up, but it helps to have all the information on a subject.
https://lc.org/PDFs/Trump.Accomplishments.FINAL.pdf
Apologies, I just saw your earlier response to this link, didn't mean to repost
Trump and his Conservative cult are the Red State faction of the American Evil Empire.
This is opposed to Biden and his Liberal cult, who are the Blue State faction of the American Evil Empire.
The political "differences" between them are just like American democracy in general: as fake as professional wrestling.
At the end of the day, both factions support the American Empire and its dominance of the world--which, in Orwellian American fashion, they both call "defending freedom and democracy."
Their only differences are the *tactics* they push in order to achieve this shared imperial ambition.
Trump thus had his Make American (Empire) Great Again slogan.
And Biden had his American (Empire) Is Back slogan.
The Red Staters want the American Empire to focus on war against China or Iran/Islam in order to maintain American world dominance.
The Blue Staters want the American Empire to focus on war against Russia in order to maintain American world dominance.
That is why these Red State Conservatives are aggressively pushing anti-China or anti-Islam propaganda so as to manufacture public consent for American escalation against them.
And that is why Blue State Liberals are aggressively pushing anti-Russia propaganda so as to manufacture public consent for American escalation against it.
The Red States and Blue States are two sides of the same imperial American coin.
Both sides will try to portray themselves as "anti-Establishment critics" or even as "antiwar dissidents."
And both sides are lying through their teeth.
As Vladimir Putin himself has said, America is the Empire of Lies.
Everything about America is deception--including its phony political factions and US democracy itself.
I fully agree with your comment, you hit the nail on the head.
3rd party stats don't win wars.
do they?
They only win you matchmaking rank on the queue, sadly. Esteemed Twitter Warriors may spend too much time in-game to remember the difference.
They're even using them wrong. Where Russia fields its T-62Ms, NATO responds with Leopards 1A5, which are of the same age, output and WT battle rating.
Noobs.
"A defeated Ukraine will switch to horrible terror attacks against Russia "(paraphrase). OR- much more likely.....
"A defeated Ukraine, IF any of it is left standing, will start a war of terror against its false friend, the perfidious west that led it into a crazy act of self destruction. Ukraine had a get-out in April 22. Western leaders, not Russia, persuaded the Ukrainians not to take it. Its annihilation then became inevitable.
I have said all along that ultimately the interests of the West and the Russians will converge over the head of, and against, Ukraine. And Zelenskiiy knows this. He knows this in his worst sweaty nightmares because at a gut level the truth is unavoidable.
So Ukraine is going to become a terrorist country. I seem to recall Russia promising to be very tough on terrorists...
they have been they have kicked them out of their territories
Terrorism against the west not inflicted by Russia but caused by the west itself, the same western hegemon who, with its notorious history of using terrorists as proxies, will be getting back some of its own medicine. Karma.
Everyone wants a just solution, and karma is the ultimate justice. I am sure Russia will do its noble, magnanimous, forgiving, Christian best to contain this menace as a favour to the west.
The western hegemon, caught up in a torpor of Repetition Compulsion, has only one tool in the kit
You are right - if you were a Ukie terrorist or gangster - where would you go to terrorise or organise gangsterisms?
The fat pickings to be had in EU bloated and weak capital cities? Or in Russian ex Ukraine they have just killed you and evicted you from?
Yeh, go terrorise EU and its population on behalf of USA. Gladio 2.0.
not on behalf of the US - they've had enough of sucking those dumbos dry, on behalf of themselves
with a little push in the right direct from 1M RF soldiers, of course
USUK will be the ones organising the terror, ala Crocus. Ukraine has very little agency, and as the situation deteriorates for them this will reduce even more. This is part of the neocons American century plans.
If the Russians are backing it then yes, it may come to that. My feeling is that they will be looking for a far bigger prize than some Gladio payback though.
Neither the US not the UK are successful terrorists on their own - and after this defeat they will be even less inclined, as to harbour them or provide bases and logistics will be the EU and the rump Ukraine
- the USUK have on occasion used terrorists who have turned against them, 9/11 is a classic example you would do well to remember, as would they
The Ukraine is another example - these terrorists/gangsters will invade the US, and EU, hardened by war, with the arms provided by the USUK, with refugee status, and with USUK cash to finance them
Terrorists and lunatics don't differentiate. It depends on who is paying them too. If they hate Russia enough to destroy themselves, I doubt they would think logically about who drove them to hell.
The extermination of human beings if all ages in Gaza by jews (with impunity!) has somewhat normalized all kinds of crimes against humanity, such as bombing the hospitals and maternal wards, bombing schools with children inside, and using white phosphorous while pulverizing whole blocks of high-rise buildings filled with living people. The televised Real holocaust of Palestinians should have made AIPAC dealers (and members of all major jewish organizations) into pariahs. But no! The US congresspeople are afraid to say a word against the jews-run crimes against humanity, including the mass slaughter of children (jewish fascist do this with joy). Instead, the "antisemitism bill" was produced by the American compradors propped up on the high-echelon positions of power by jewish money and jewish blackmail. The zionist owners of the collective west do not care about western civilization or any civilization for this matter. The Looters and Usurers are possessed by their greed and supremacist zeal. It is long overdue for Europeans to hunt down and lock into separate cells the EU compradors who have been feeding and weaponizing the Ukrainian neo-nazis for the expense of the basic security of the European populations.
This Korea Russia treaty is no different than the Korean War, no ? Didn't Russia and China sponsor Korea through that ? Even sending troops in ?
When Russia grabs Konstantinovka, what will they change the name to, so I can rewrite the lyrics to "You can't go back to Constantinople" and have it ready. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XlO39kCQ-8
Troll
Why are you calling me a troll ?
Because you're clickbaiting - there is, I'd say evidently, a world of difference between the situation leading up to the war in Korea and now, yet the proximate interests of the RF Korea and China remain valid, if in need of the recent re calibration
To say the RF will invade Turkey is merely nonsense
"Clickbaiting" What the fuck are you talking about ? Do you even know what clickbait or a troll is or you couldn't wait to use the terms somewhere ? Stay off the internet if you can't put intelligent comments together.
Now you're angerbaiting, N°2 of the five stages of troll
- relax - soon you'll be able to do your stuff calmly - then you can put in for your pay and roll out the nonsense 9 to 5
No I'm masturbating and no matter how much you beg, you can't watch. Do you happen to know if your mother drank or took drugs when she was carrying you ?
Anytime NATO or it's Alpha Male, the USA, goes anywhere near the Chinese or Russian border , in the case of Korea, you have both, China and Russia send troops and arms streaming in and beat the living shit out of NATO. People think the USA was fighting Koreans and Vietnamese in their respective wars but many of the troops were speaking Mandarin and the anti-aircraft batteries had Russian 'trainers". This is really no different than Ukraine.
One doesn't want 15 second nukes on their border, or for their major, or even minor, cities to be within easy range of artillery, or any other ballistic (unguided) missiles. The only thing perhaps novel about this treaty is it codifies what has always been understood and it makes Korea reciprocate with assistance. Korea will always do that anyway as their existence depends on Chinese and Russian protection and help.
Are they really this dumb?
Putin will lose power if they start bombing schools, because he's not doing enough?
The logical implication being that they are FORCING Putin to do "enough". And that's probably not great news for Ukraine.
"You're not killing Ukrainians fast enough so we have to remind you to do it by blowing up kindergartens"
Ukrainian jews can't wait to have a "land without people" to create Israel 2.0. There is a youtube-posted recording of jews singing from the roof of a jewish center in Dnipro (Menorah) about Ukraine being a "jewish land." It would be great if this ugly jewish center Menorah gets bombed to the ground.
When its full, yes.
They're freely bombing apartment buildings in Belgorod.
Putin is pretending notihng is happening. In fact, the MoD is actively hiding what is happening, by not reporting the nature of these strikes.
What makes us think that if there is an ATACMS strike on a school in Belgorod, with hundreds killed, Putin will do anything? Given past behavior? Crocus City happened, were there any consequences to anyone responsible? No. Why would it be any different?
But in that case perhaps it is indeed time for Putin to go and for someone who will do something to take the reigns.
What would you have Putin do? Engage in a massive offensive that ends up with a ton of attrition on the Russian army?
He should do what he promised he would do -- strike "decision making centers".
That means missiles strikes on the key mansions and bunkers around Europe, as a first step.
The basic situation is the following: Western elites are fighting Russia using Ukrainian elites as a middle man and the Ukrainian working class as cannon fodder in order to subjugate Russia and steal its resources (and it could be much more sinister than that, because they might want to repopulate the land too, given where the climate crisis is headed).
What do you do in such a situation if you want to make it stop? Who do you go after? You have four options:
1) Targeted strikes to destroy the Western elites
2) Targeted strikes to destroy Ukrainian elites
3) Attrition war of extermination against the Ukrainian cannon fodder (who are really your own Russian people once the brainwashing is removed)
4) Countervalue strategic strikes against Western populations
Which one would stop the war and punish the ones responsible?
Well, of course option #3. Isn't that obvious? And definitely not the first two options...
"That means missiles strikes on the key mansions and bunkers around Europe, as a first step."
That's immediate direct war with all of NATO. Terrible idea.
"Which one would stop the war and punish the ones responsible?
Well, of course option #3. Isn't that obvious? And definitely not the first two options..."
Option 1 is the declaration of total war, which would be massively destructive to the Russian people.
Option 2 would do nothing but make those people killed martyrs. There are numerous empty suits (or empty tshirts in Zelensky's case) who would fill their shoes immediately.
It'd make better sense to target all the NATO technical (AD/drone/maintenance/repair etc) "advisers" in Ukraine, plus maybe blow up half of the CIA bases to send a message. :)
Putin won't end the world with nuclear weapons in a temper tantrum, that means he's a coward!
Liked ... assuming the implied /sarc tag.
Thanks for the great article as always! I had a simple question for you or any of the knowledgeable readers - I was wondering how NK maintains such significant production capacity even in the face of all the sanctions etc that it faces? Are those sanctions just not effective, or circumvented by the ability to trade easily with Russia and China over the border? Or is it more just a matter of their priorities, being very focussed on military preparedness and industry rather than pushing resources to other things? Thank you!
All of the above.
The agreement in North Korea is certainly a gift to Kim. Russia can get war material and NK gets some ” protection”, dubious of what, but still protection from Russia. NK has never relaxed and is a paranoid state after the devastating war 1950-53 when millions of koreans perished.
US ”containment” policy and threats has never let them to relax. Without nukes they would have been in the same shallow grave as Khaddafi and Saddam. I doubt NK kan produce millions of shells and missiles unless Russia feeds them with food and sought after commodities. So this was good news. Putin shows the world that he can also play game. And it is what the Atlanticists want him to do - play the Evil. I hope Putin will help Cuba and Venezuela with missiles and Iran to build nukes. A shipload of nukes to Cuba will lit it all up.
All is quiet on the Eastern front comes to mind when I read the rest. Next post.
I wouldn't write off DPRK's production capabilities. It has an almost entirely homegrown defense sector and its scientific education is quite strong. It spends most of its resources on defense so not surprising they can produce this much. It would be nice to see them expanding the civlian sector hopefully with Russia's help
Exactly - see the comment about arms and aid to Iran from NK
A tiny nation that has kept the US world at bay for 80 years pretty much all on it's own
Very very tough
THE EMPIRE hasn't realised yet what "sleeping monsters" it has created by strangulating - training - the "opponent" in order to satisfy its PRIDE, GLUTTONY, SEX, ... urges and on top of that obfuscating it for themselves and their cronies by calling it "freedom, liberty and happiness" ... there is no liberty from TRUTH as GOD ALMIGHTY'S WORD clearly reveals.
THE SYNAGOGUE OF SATAN is facing its own poison.
The atlanticists have been playing with a magician's wand in a such stupid way that they put themselves on death row. Well done, Kagans & Bolton & private banking cartel. In the context of the ongoing and gradually heating Judea War on Russia, the warmongers have been totally oblivious to the fate of their children and grandchildren. Also, certain Ukrainians (kind of the Azovites beloved by Israelis and US congresspeople) were loudly promising to fry babies in Donbas "to a crisp." And the US/UK/EU tacitly approved the Banderites' "method." The US/UK/EU named the Banderites "freedom fighters," weaponized them and sent them hundreds of billions of dollars. Well. Now these Banderites and their "methods" are all yours, the zionized US/UK/EU. The survived Ukrainians will eventually realize what was done to their country and by whom. Hopefully, this is when Kagans & Bidens & Ursulas & Fink will be "asked questions in person" by the Ukrainians.
Well written!
My expectation is that Russia will plan for a ‘Chechen solution’ to Ukraine; both in winning the war and turning it into a permanent ally.
This is questionable due to the presence of the Ukrainian jews who still hope for jewish state 2.0. on the territory of Ukraine. It would be great if ethnic Ukrainians on the liberated territories demand the relocation of jewish shrines to either Israel or US. Remember that the putsch and civil war were heavily influenced by Straussians (American jewish fascists) and local jewish oligarchs. Kolomojsky - the president of the Jewish community of Ukraine - personally financed four (4) neo-Nazi battalions to protect his property in Donbas by murdering the civilian populations there. Hence the definition “judeo-banderites.” The Nuland-Kagan’s leading role in the maidan putsch and her open collaboration with the Ukrainian Nazi Party have demolished the shoah lies “6mln,” “gas chambers & ovens,” and the very foundation of the dirty schema of “reparations.” Israelis invited the Nazi thugs of the Azov battalion to and celebrated these followers of Stepan Bandera, (who is feted as a Hero of Ukraine by the judaized Kievan Junta). The ongoing Holocaust of the Palestinian children and women has demolished the Jewish memes the “most moral” and “most victimized.” To prevent a renewed rise of neo-nazism, Ukrainians and Russians should remove and ban all jewish organizations on the territory of Ukraine. The judaic/ talmudic education produces psychotic haters of genocidal kind; see all major jewish organizations in the North America approving the ongoing genocide in Gaza. The indoctrinated zionists are enemies of humanity
Panic time in the co-habiting west:
F-16 Turns 50 Special: What It Takes To Become A Viper Pilot (https://theaviationist.com/2024/01/21/viper-pilot-training/) ...and that is assuming the trainees speak english. Then, of course, the UA will not be getting the latest models. It will be the junk.
NATO logistics are a disaster. For example, the swiss Gotthard Pass rail tunnel is not fully used because DE and IT have not modernized their RR (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Pass). Estonia has abandoned "Rail Baltica". The project to standardize RR gauges in the Baltics.
The anal retentive brits are always great with their terror stories. eg "attacking children." And boulevard press like the german BILD (https://www.bild.de/) and EXPRESS (https://www.express.co.uk/) appeal to the great unwashed and not much else.
Actually you get better news coverage from Sorcha Fall (https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index4647.htm). There, at least you have active links to all "her" sources. :)
Thanks for these reports - F-16: I understand maintenance crews and spare parts and logisitics and weapons suites are far from finalised, let alone suitable airfields with adequate fuel supplies and electricity
Plus due to late deliveries of the F-35's some countries (Denmark...) wish to keep their F-16s until
The Balts are indeed on the other side of the looking glass - Latvia let their rail network to ruin, along with supporting industries - they nowq rely entirely on RF goodwill to repair their ailing coaches engines and so on
As for the Brits - they hallucinate as if they are all caterpillar smoking hookars, sorry hookahs -https://www.thetimes.com/uk/defence/article/why-are-arms-dealers-hiking-prices-for-ukraine-92hqdtlx2.... we need $800Billion just for arms....it's the we ....
Thank you for the Sorcha Fall link - very useful
F16 needs AWACS target vectoring and mid air refuelers to be effective. Fine when the other side has no Electronic Warfare, air-to-air/surface-to-air missiles or air force
Yes and thank you - these are points made by Will Schryver also
For info here is his post from a few months back
https://nitter.poast.org/imetatronink/status/1661059852897259521#m
A discussion of some of the most relevant considerations —
It is effectively impossible to base F-16s in Ukraine. The available runways are woefully deficient, and any aircraft remaining at one base for more than a single sortie are going to become a target of Russian strikes, along with the base infrastructure.
The Ukrainian air force has only managed to retain a handful of airframes to this point in time by assiduously hiding them, and constantly moving them around, using improvised airfields much of the time (highways, grass fields, etc.) The sortie rate of the remaining UAF aircraft is so small as to be nearly invisible. Indeed, with few exceptions, if they fly, they die.
But at least Soviet-era jets were designed and constructed to fly out of "guerrilla airfields". F-16s are not. F-16s require pristine runways and intensive maintenance after each sortie — almost 20 hours of maintenance for each hour of flight time!!!
This means highly trained / exceedingly experienced NATO ground crews and fully equipped maintenance hangars would need to be available anywhere the F-16 seeks to fly — along with an abundant supply of spare parts, spare engines, etc.
That simply is not going to happen in Ukraine.
‼️ This means the only plausible basing option will be at NATO facilities in Poland and/or Romania. And anyone attempting to argue against this reality is engaging in pure fantasy.
And, of course, flying F-16s against Russia from bases in Poland and/or Romania is tantamount to a formal declaration of WAR.
But let's assume NATO chooses that option ...
First, we need to consider what the mission of these F-16s will be. Is it to launch with long-range cruise missiles, rise to high altitude, and fire them from distant stand-off range? Because, as I understand it, the F-16 cannot carry, for example, a British Storm Shadow missile. The F-16 is not well-suited for the long-range stand-off role.
Furthermore, an F-16 at altitude over Ukraine is going to be seen by Russian AD assets from hundreds of miles away, and Russian air to air missiles and S-400 SAMs will outrange the F-16s capability to defend itself in almost any scenario.
Additionally, the Russians have clearly demonstrated the capability to routinely shoot down any stand-off munition NATO has launched against them.
I don't see how an F-16 mission to launch long-range stand-off strikes against Russian targets is going to produce any meaningful tactical successes, let along appreciable strategic effects. And I am certain it would only take the Russians a day or two to formulate highly effective ambushes against this tactic. Each subsequent F-16 sortie would then become a one-way kamikaze attack.
As for close-air support (CAS) of ground troops or combat air patrol (CAP) against Russian attack aircraft, there is simply no way the F-16 can accomplish either of those missions without readily available in-air refueling! And that is simply not going to happen over Ukraine. NATO's big, fat, slow tankers will be shot out of the sky at will by the Russians! There is no way of getting around that reality.
Moreover, from the moment the first F-16 commences an attack sortie from a NATO airfield, all NATO ISR assets in the theater will become targets. They will either cease to fly, or cease to exist. And, without them, the F-16 is no longer a useful tool.
Neither F-16s, nor any variety of NATO strike aircraft, are made to function in isolation from the huge logistical infrastructure that supports them. Therefore, the very sentence "Send F-16s to Ukraine" is a logically nonsensical statement.
Simply put, I cannot conceive of ANY way F-16s can be used against Russian forces in Ukraine, even if the latest generation of F-16 Vipers were being flown by experienced NATO pilots.
And, quite frankly, the same limitations would apply to ANY variety of NATO strike aircraft attempting to fly against the Russian military in its own backyard.
If the policy makers of the #EmpireAtAllCosts cult succeed in initiating an air war against Russia in eastern Europe, it will result in catastrophic losses for US/NATO air power and the comprehensive destruction of the myth of US military supremacy.
They're not supposed to be used against Russian forces, they're going to bomb Russian cities, refineries, power stations etc. While operating from NATO airfields, you're absolutely right about that.
? You are talking about F-16's - taking off from extreme western Ukraine, at best, if not further out....They have an operational range of 500k max....how are they going to get to bomb inside Russia?
You should know at least something of what you are writing about - but even so read S and read the comments above - try and investigate
I'm telegraphing the consensus on the topic from Russia actually. F-16s won't pull off dogfights, they'll be too few and underpowered for that. Maybe an ambush or two, or spreading out missiles with active homing in the general direction of a target in hope that the warhead finds something to lock on at the final stage. Their main role is to deploy 300-500 km air-to-surface missiles, which Ukraine's Joint Force Commandes literally said in February. Additional target guidance is expected from Swedish ASC-890 that were given to Ukraine but will operate from behind NATO border and other sources.
Additional target guidance is expected from Swedish ASC-890 that were given to Ukraine but will operate from behind NATO border and other sources.
Thank you for the link!
"assuming the trainees speak english"
Minor point: actually NATO militaries in Nato nations have been training Ukrainian pilots to speak English long before F-16 deliveries were mooted or agreed. Of course there are other problems, but that seems unlikely to be one of them. ;)
Commentariat is such a great word, so apropos to the current milieu.
The strength, resourcefulness, manufacturing capacity and technological prowess of DPRK has long been underestimated. Its involvement in the Middle East has been extensive and its impact profound. Much of Iran's technological military capability can be attributed to DPRK--as can the engineering of its impenetrable underground fortresses. DRPK has been providing extensive military and technical training and support to Syria for decades. And Hezbollah's tight organizational structure and iron discipline are both products of its relationship with North Korea. For those interested in details, the sections on Syria, Iran and Hezbollah in A.B.Abrams' "Immovable Object" are a good start. Russia has found a very tough and capable ally. Their potential contributions to Russia's military capacity are significant. It's easy to see why Vlad paid them a visit.
Where can I read up more on this?
There are Russian sites, also you need to read between the lines on DPRK's production capability when reading from South Korean or American sources.
Here:
http://library.lol/main/5A144C6C4DE82C7514E2DD34FADE5521
Thank you for the reference - which would be a useful basis for "resolving" anything. But of course gender, affirmation.... are so much more convenient.
You can also watch this and then use some of your imagination and common sense to add 2 and 2 together....
https://youtu.be/tYBmiwlp3Rg?si=HZK3389ioa-LI6dG
Thank you for this information - much overlooked
It's hard to see why it took him quite so long - except that he waited until the Joint Declaration made it clear that RF and China strategic interests are inseperable
This will also provide some relief for the long suffering population of Nth K
About time too
I think Putin has been disappointed by the level of support from China. Can't support that statement with anything other than reading his expressions during his China visit.
I do know he had hoped to get a deal done on a second fuel line, Power of Siberia 2, but it didn't happen. China may feel it needs to horde its resources and its oil use has dropped. There is also the nasty possibility that China would love to acquire some Russian territory in exchange for any help or who knows what else. Again I am speculating, but IMO Putin did not look happy.
His disappointment may have made his NK agreements more in-depth than he would have liked. Not because he doesn't value the relationship, not because he doesn't respect their abilities, not that he doesn't hold Kim in high regard for his accomplishments, but because Kim is potentially volatile.
And with good reason; Kim has every justification to be sick to death of 70 plus years of US mistreatment, and now SK is once again being super annoying. Kim with a bear at his back just might pop off and create a war on yet another front for Russia.
A positive possibility could come out of all of this; NK "boots on the ground" in Ukraine. Now if I was NATO and I saw, say 100,000 North Koreans show up armed to the teeth, I might push for a deal. For behind that 100,000 are about 6 million more and all of them are as annoyed at the West as is Kim.
Putin discerned, that he can trust just so much in China.
The trip to NK, and Vietnam was a signal for the West and China as well.
The JD with China is an exhaustive document detailing collaboration in every area – between a country at war and one trying to avoid war, both finding this distinction useful to eachother, but requiring a great deal of prudent application
The levels at which the two are currently operating are distinct – RF is engaged (Ukraine) in an open ended operation which has no clear conclusion; China the reverse, engaged (Taiwan) in a fight against time which has no possible conclusion they are prepared to accept
China is even more rigid autonomous patient and determined that the RF, but the nature of each predicament requires the multipolar solution, which in turns imposes flexibility and concessions
These are difficult to operate in time of war or pre war- hence the importance of the RF NK agreements, this eliminates one source of urgency and stress
The counter party will be some kind of agreement in the Ukraine/Europe
Nonetheless – no smiles: remember the smiles VVP GWB fishing in Maine? Paddling round the cattle in Texas? Who needs smiles
There are many other levels in which there are clear distinctions between the two – reconciling these by application of new norms and principles is the essence of multipolar, and of the JD, very much more difficult to construct than a temporary alliance or understanding that appears useful or even equable until it does not
True, the meetings appear to have been deadly serious. But they did have fun, and did exchange gifts, neat ones at that. Here are some videos and memes re one of the gifts, a Russian limo.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/vladimir-putin-and-kim-jong-un-car-drive
https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/world/putin-kim-jong-uns-joy-car-ride-video-sparks-meme-fest-what-are-they-plotting/ar-BB1oCfoM
I was writing about the JD - this very serious, as are Xi and the Chinese leadership
The countries are in rather different positions and with somewhat different priorities and strengths- these need a lot work to parallelise or harmonise
Here VVP is, for once, slightly out of his depth - The CCP apparatus is overwhelming
NK is easy - now the JD has allowed general agreements for two rather natural allies who both have long experience of war - it is clear that this is a liberation for NK and deeply felt
Hence the boys in cars smiles
I sent this photo to some who have little reason for sympathy for either one, and plan to send to others
I agree, China is a very different Partner with a top priority to avoid entanglements, they still need the West. NK is a. "just say the word" kind of ally. A refreshing change for Putin I am sure.
And for NK, Russia's recognition and partnership taken to a new level is Heaven sent.
Happy to hear you had a chance to check the links, I do love the video of them driving around laughing.
If nothing else, NK food shortages should be a thing of the past, with Russian wheat on tap.
In 2004 when I lived in Bangkok I knew someone (a Pommie) who was a commercial agent of NK products. Textiles, gems, minerals, machinery, military vehicles and equipment, and more, all home grown. The coloured brochures were very eye opening.
Considering every building was destroyed by the Great Satan in early fifties, and they have had evil food shortages imposed on them, the sanctions, the provocations, the sabotage, the biological warfare, etc it's amazing what the North Koreans have done.
And their cities are now as modern as Astana's.
They are not given enough respect or credit.
It is the opening of a second front, or are we at the third now
Third I reckon, Jukraine being one and Palestine the second. Bets on the fourth welcome. Taiwan?
I'm in favour of the Sahel/Libya
But sure Taiwan too
Hey! You are forgetting Syria :)
All Asian nations have IQ 100 and above
Jewish (Israeli) IQ = 93
Ukrainian IQ = 91
https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php
специальная военная операция and северный военный округ are not the same though their initials are the same.
Hello, could you explain? Is not the NMD part of the SMO?
Special Military Operation and Northern Military District
It seems to me that several automatic translators refuse to translate СВО properly. E.g., in "the importance of the defense industry is growing rapidly. We not only equip our soldiers in the Northern Military District" it could be the NMD, but it's probably the SMO. There are instances where it is obvious that it's the SMO. I wonder if Google and Twitter would be penalized if its automatic translators translated СВО properly.
According to Wikipedia, the NMD was recently incorporated into the Leningrad Military District.
Got it, thank you
The DPRK already enjoys a mutual defense treaty with China, which makes it a unique, pivotal state in interesting ways.
You do pop in unusual places...Keep coming. I enjoyed your UNZ comments.
I have long considered the DPRK to be the most likely route for Chinese military assistance to Russia.
Fuel, metals, chemicals and technicians from Beijing to Pyongyang become weapons and munitions from Pyongyang to Moscow.
There is a long history of nations scrubbing or sanitizing weapons to try and conceal their origins, but the further upstream in the industrial process the more effective that sanitizing would be. Train loads of semi-finished gun parts would be considered military aid, but train loads of scrap iron and coal would not be.
bravo
All of this looks suspiciously coordinated, to contrast the knee jerk reactionary plans the west throws out every other week.
Here is Asia, the Russian moves are basically to pin down two major blocks that the US was counting on to counter Russia and China :
1) "Modernizing" North Korea pins down Japan and South Korea, with the potential for direct strikes against their metropolitan areas. This again sucks up more demand for scarce US interceptors and missiles, which the US would ideally want to position around Taiwan - remember the "hellscape" the US promised to turn the Taiwan Strait into? Yeah, it can't do that if the Chinese can light up anything they want with their rockets. Let us also not forget that South Korea is, constututionally, prohibited from sending arms to a warzone, something the current government could ignore with a fig leaf excuse, but if a North Korean threat starts to become more credible, those million shell shipments to Ukraine become a major point of contention.
2) Drawing Vietnam into BRICS further compromises any ideas of a 'South East Asian Nato' to counter and strangle China, which was previously heavily courted by the US, including proposals to open a US naval base in Ha Long Bay. This further splits the regional bloc, ASEAN, with the heavyweights of Vietnam and Indonesia turning towards BRICS, and leaving the Philippines the lone beacon of US policy in the region.
Reference the Joint Declaration